THE Supreme Court has upheld the 2017 resolution of the Office of the Ombudsman indicting former Cagayan de Oro Rep. Constantino Jaraula for graft and malversation -in connection with the alleged irregular purchase of P3 million worth of bottled liquid fertilizers in 2004.
The SC promulgated it resolution on Nov.18 last but only recently made it public.
Jaraula had questioned the Ombudsman resolution issued on April 2017 which found probable cause for the filing of graft and malversation charges against him based on a Commission in Audit report indicating that the purchase of 10,000 bottles of liquid fertilizer for the entire Northern Mindanao (Region 10) in the amount of P3 million was “overpriced.”
The money used for the purchase of the fertilizers were appropriated from the Department of Agriculture’s Farm Inputs and Implements Program which was released to Jaraula’s office. The amount was turned over to the Philippine Social Development Foundation Inc. (PSDFI) for the purchase of 3,700 bottles of liquid fertilizer for farmer-beneficiaries.
COA said that based on its canvass, a bottle of liquid fertilizer could be bought for only P133.50, but the purchase price for Jaraula’s district was at P800 per bottle.
The audit report also noted the lack of a list of the supposed farmer-beneficiaries.
In his defense, Jaraula said there was no reason for him to be sued since the COA did not even allege that he was in custody or control of the P3 million, adding that he merely received the liquid fertilizers for distribution.
He also stressed that his endorsement of PSDFI was not an order that it be chosen from among the non-government organizations but was just a mere request.
The former lawmaker also said that he monitored the distribution of the fertilizer which was done by the city agriculturist who distributed them to farmers in 40 rural barangays and 25 inter-land barangays.
Jaraula elevated his case to the Supreme Court after the Office of the Ombudsman turned down his motion for reconsideration on November 2017.
In his plea, Jaraula said the Ombudsman committed grave abuse of discretion aside from violating his right to a speedy disposition of the cases.
However, in its resolution, the SC First Division sided with the Ombudsman and said that the latter did not abuse its discretion when it ruled that there was probable cause to pursue the case.
“We find that the Ombudsman committed no grave abuse of discretion in finding probable cause. Its findings were based on evidence on record and on its consideration of the allegations and assertions of all parties,” the SC ruling said.
